↓ Skip to main content

Presentations to general practice before a cancer diagnosis in Victoria: a cross‐sectional survey

Overview of attention for article published in Medical Journal of Australia, July 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (73rd percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
6 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
20 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
58 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Presentations to general practice before a cancer diagnosis in Victoria: a cross‐sectional survey
Published in
Medical Journal of Australia, July 2016
DOI 10.5694/mja15.01169
Pubmed ID
Authors

Karen Lacey, James F Bishop, Hannah L Cross, Patty Chondros, Georgios Lyratzopoulos, Jon D Emery

Abstract

To assess variations in the number of general practitioner visits preceding a cancer diagnosis, and in the length of the interval between the patient first suspecting a problem and their seeing a hospital specialist. Analysis of data provided to the Cancer Patient Experience Survey (CPES; survey response rate, 37.7%) by 1552 patients with one of 19 cancer types and treated in one of five Victorian Comprehensive Cancer Centre hospitals, 1 October 2012 - 30 April 2013. The primary outcome was the proportion of patients who had had three or more GP consultations about cancer-related health problems before being referred to hospital. The secondary outcome was the interval between the patient first suspecting a problem and their seeing a hospital specialist. 34% of the patients included in the final analyses (426 of 1248) had visited a GP at least three times before referral to a hospital doctor. The odds ratios (reference: rectal cancer; adjusted for age, sex, language spoken at home, and socio-economic disadvantage index score) varied according to cancer type, being highest for pancreatic cancer (3.2; 95% CI, 1.02-9.9), thyroid cancer (2.5; 95% CI, 0.9-6.6), vulval cancer (2.5; 95% CI, 0.7-8.7) and multiple myeloma (2.4; 95% CI, 1.1-5.5), and lowest for patients with breast cancer (0.4; 95% CI, 0.2-0.8), cervical cancer (0.5; 95% CI, 0.1-2.1), endometrial cancer (0.5; 95% CI, 0.2-1.4) or melanoma (0.7; 95% CI, 0.3-1.5). Cancer type also affected the duration of the interval from symptom onset to seeing a hospital doctor; it took at least 3 months for more than one-third of patients with prostate or colon cancer to see a hospital doctor. Certain cancer types were more frequently associated with multiple GP visits, suggesting they are more challenging to recognise early. In Victoria, longer intervals from the first symptoms to seeing a hospital doctor for colon or prostate cancer may reflect poorer community symptom awareness, later GP referral, or limited access to gastroenterology and urology services.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 58 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Australia 1 2%
Unknown 57 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 11 19%
Researcher 6 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 10%
Other 5 9%
Student > Bachelor 4 7%
Other 14 24%
Unknown 12 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 21 36%
Nursing and Health Professions 7 12%
Mathematics 3 5%
Psychology 3 5%
Business, Management and Accounting 2 3%
Other 8 14%
Unknown 14 24%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 03 March 2020.
All research outputs
#6,239,802
of 25,377,790 outputs
Outputs from Medical Journal of Australia
#2,358
of 5,725 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#99,573
of 377,580 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Medical Journal of Australia
#23
of 34 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,377,790 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 75th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,725 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 20.9. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 58% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 377,580 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 73% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 34 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.